About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
CSPAN 3
CSPAN2 3
CNN 1
CNNW 1
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
was a speechwriter for ronald reagan. we have worked closely on a wide range of things. and i just told him, mr. speaker, since i'm leaving congress, he's taught me one thing and one thing only, and that is how to make margaritas. with that i'm happy to yield to my friend, mr. rohrabacher. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. rohrabacher: i rise in support of the rule and this legislation and note that the classified nature of that margarita formula should never be disclosed to an enemy of the united states, of course, but we will be glad to transmit that information to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. in the spirit of bipartisanship. i do rise in support of this rule and h.r. 6156. the legislation to grant permanent normal trade relations status to russia. during the 19 0's as was just mentioned, i worked for ronald reagan in the white house and was part of a team dedicating itselves to bring down the soviet dictatorship. i might add that dave dryor was a member of that team. today's russia is not yesterday's soviet union. that's the most i
. there is that incentive as well. you have to look at ronald reagan as well as henry kissinger, when they went into negotiations, said you have to come willing to truly cut a deal. you may get 90%. >> takes both sides. obama is very good in liberal rhetoric blaming republicans. even in "l.a. times", obama wants to help the middle class but republicans don't want to give everything to the rich which is not true. and a lot of liberals are saying this was a mandate to raise taxes? i think people can be pro-choice, pro-day marriage and have fiscal responsibility and live within their means. jon: well, i mean to be honest, angela, the president campaigned on a platform saying i'm going to go back to the bill clinton tax rates and the wealthiest are going to have to pay more money and he won. >> but bill clinton worked with a republican congress and our economy was not in dire straits that it is right now. so if he really wants to go back to the bill clinton days he should go to the table and work with republicans. >> also you have to look taxes were historical high. one of the things they're talkin
the rates. think about it. we haven't touched it since ronald reagan really. in 1986. bill clinton did raise the rate one point but we haven't done anything to touch our rate and reform our code. every other country, all of them have. taxes gone from 16% to 15%. you do business there. this flow of capital will follow countries that have more competitive environment and taxes are one of them. yes, we have to reform the tax code. when you do that, i will get more revenue. it is guaranteed. again, sort of as i was talking about earlier. this is opportunities here. this is opportunity for us as a country. if you look at the congressional budget analysis and joint tax committee analysis, what tax reform could mean in terms of macroeconomic impact and growth, all will lead to more growth, whether corporate tax reform or individual tax reform. >> right but if the president insists as he did last friday, this was fought over in the campaign and, fought over tax rates, rising tax rates, he didn't ice the words rates himself but jay carney, the white house press secretary said the president will veto
is ronald reagan. the numbers are still being counted in the west coast so it will be bigger. obama has the bigger margin of victory than george bush did in 2004. and remember that george bush declared himself a mandate into how. >> stephanie: how long bigger do you think the poplar vote margin would have been if it weren't to hurricane sandy. obviously the popular vote would have been bigger. >> caller: no, it's clear. i wouldn't be surprised if we get to a four-point margin. this is how good this is. we are close if it expands to half a percent, which is doable with the ballots in california arizona and washington and oregon. president obamamitt romney will have around 47% of the vote. >> stephanie: how ironic tee hee. congratulations on all your rightness and smartness. >> caller: thanks very much. >> what universe is dick morris not part of the media. he's complaining about the media and his mug is on fox news every five minutes. >> stephanie: myth busters is taking you to task for saying it's too landslides in a row. >> it's not two lan landslides in a row. >> stephanie: what do y
's just that second terms have become synonymous with scandal. richard nixon's second term. ronald reagan's second term. my heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not. >> the iran contra affair. bill clinton. >> i did not have sexual relations with that woman. impeached after the lewinsky mess. . that's trouble for roughly 100% of reelected presidents since 1972. enough to give you second thoughts about that second term. so, is there anything the obama team can do to prevent this? now, as bill clinton might say -- >> it depends upon what the meaning of the word is. >> the fact is, if there is going to be a second term scandal, it's seeds were probably sewn in the first term. the watergate break in, nixon's first term -- >> if the obama team was going to mess up, history suggests they already did. maybe it's something that has made headlines already, but maybe not, the lewinsky scandal didn't surface in 1998, maybe the obama administration will make it's own history and avoid a second term scandal. if not, disney world will seem
very important things for the country. think of ronald reagan and tip o'neill reforming social security. ron reagan and tip o'neill during the current tax reform. bill clinton and the republican congress doing welfare reform and balancing the budget. we look forward to making this divided government productive for the american people, and we have, as everyone knows, a lot of challenges at the end of the year. i will be meeting with the president and the other leadership on friday to talk about the way forward. we look forward to being a part of the solution to the significant problems. it is my pleasure to turn to our newly elected whip, senator john cornyn of texas. >> is an honor to serve as the assistant leader on the republican side. we have a lot of very difficult work to do, but we are committed to working with our colleagues across the aisle to solve the nation's urgent problems. we know what those are in the lame duck and we know what those are going forward. there is no mystery about that, nor is there any mystery to some of the solutions based on the president's own bipartisan
s, of considers under ronald reagan and george w. bush's tax rates in 2003. it's interesting, i found two universal effects of those tax cuts. first, in every instance we cut the rates, the economy worked faster. it did work, mr. president, we got a lot of growth. but the second may be more interesting, is that guess what happened to the share of taxes paid by the rich. they went up, in fact, if you want to get more money, mr. president, out of rich people, cut their tax rate, don't raise them, because history proves it. >> dave: certainly did in the reagan years and another peace in the wall street journal a couple back, clinton rates, raised top tier 39.6 and as the authors of that piece said produced the one period of shared prosperity not because they raised taxes, but certainly lead to growth, right? >> no question. the 1990's was a prosperous era, but i think that sometimes people get a little of that history wrong what happened in the 1990's, president clinton raised taxes in the first year in office and remember, the first two years in office were a catastrophe and in fa
. bill bradley and i started with the first bill on this, and then ronald reagan picked it up and really carried at, and we got it done in a bipartisan way. when we did our original bill, we took out a mortgage deduction, we took out the charitable deduction, we took out everything, and we got right down to christie, it was 10%, 50%, 25% was the top rate, and we thought it was an elegant bill, but it could not pass muster political. we had all the real estate people and all the mortgage bankers and everybody came to town and said you get rid of the mortgage interest deduction is the end of the world, so we lost that. and all the university presidents and all the priests and all the other charities came and said you cannot get rid of that. the only thing we call on to was state and local income tax, and how we hang -- hung on to that i would never know. in the end, we were able to lower individual rates by taking more money from the corporate side, which i do not think you can do now. everybody is saying that corporate rate is too high in america, said to be competitive we have to get at
, it tried to put facts behind ronald reagan saying we fought a war on poverty and poverty won. he basically argued the welfare state had hurt poor people particularly african-americans by discouraging marriage, encouraging laziness, encouraging people to have children out-of-wedlock. he put all the blame on poverty programs. as i was writing this book charles murray writes another book called coming apart:the state of white america and charles murray is now basically saying the same thing about white lower class, really working class men, white men, that he was saying about african-americans in the 80s, that they are working less and getting married less frequently not because of any change in the economy or in culture but because they can be supported by government. he also blamed feminism and that is very interesting. he really has an analysis that says working-class white people struggling because they are lazy and don't get married and hook up. so i started to think white people are starting to say the same thing about you, so mitt romney's 47% remark where he was talking about a majori
-- ronald reagan as president -- worked together to make our tax code more logical, more equitable, and more efficient. ten years later, divided government produced a sweeping overhaul of our welfare system, under then-president bill clinton. conservative republicans joined with a democratic president to help millions of lower-income people break free of the cycle of dependency and despair. of course, we know we've had divided government. as i said earlier, we really had a status quo election in that sense. we've had divided government since january 2011 when republicans regained the majority in the house of representatives. the result over the last two years, sadly, it has produced legislative stalemates and bitter recriminations. why should anybody expect that things will be different going forward? i think, mr. president, what's different now from then is that republicans and democrats alike recognize we are at a crossroads, that our current fiscal path is unsustainable, and that we're either going to send the economy back into a recession -- unless we deal with the fiscal cliff and the s
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)